World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Fannie Mae will make a payment of $59.4 billion to the U.S.Treasury as a result of improvement of conditions in the housing markets that enable Fannie to writeup the value of devalued assets on its balance sheet. Fannie showed a profit of $8.1 billion for the first quarter of 2013 from its activities of guaranteeing and investing in home loans in the U.S. In 2008 the U.S. government bailed out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the agencies received $117 billion in government assistance since then. With this $59.4 billion about $95 billion has been paid back to the U.S. Treasury. This also delays the debt ceiling deadline to Oct. 1, 2013 by generating more revenues for the U.S. Treasury in addition to higher tax revenues.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
About $229 billion, three fourth of Greece's debt, is now held by the European Central Bank, the IMF and the European Commission. This is taxpayer money and the governments are making sure that they get back bailout loans in the form of interest payments. About two thirds of the $177 billion given to Greece as bailout loans since May 2010 actually came back to the ECB, IMF, and the EC, in the form of interest. The ECB is keen on recovering taxpayer money. The money route has been setup with an escrow account in Greece for bailout loans so that interest payments get paid, and this money cannot be used for any other purpose. Banking experts say this is a practice in risk management, and with Greece's poor record in finances the controls have been put in place to recover money the ECB invested in Greek bonds in an effort to calm nervous financial markets and now gets about 10% in annual interest payment. Under earlier debt restructuring for private creditors to Greece a haircut of over 50% on Greek bonds was taken, with the ECB insisting on receiving full payment. If Greece were to repudiate the loans under a new elected government losses would have to be taken by the ECB, IMF, and EC, and by private creditors. The ECB has Greek bonds in the range of $44 billion to $69 billion, and the European Financial Stability Facility $88 billion, by some estimates. Greece's exit from the euro would result in losses on these bonds .for the ECB and the EFSF, ultimately European taxpayers. It would also make the new bonds to private creditors under the restructuring of little value which is why European banks would not favor that outcome. Greece's tax receipts at some point, possibly 2013, would exceed basic operating expenses of the government, at which point a future Greek government might decide to exit the euro and stop interest payments on debt in its best interest....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration is pushing for new U.S. fuel efficiency standards of 56.2 mpg by 2025. In May 2009 President Obama announced domestic car and light truck fuel efficiency standards of 35 mpg by 2016. Europe is expected to reach fuel efficiency of 60 mpg by 2020. This would still leave Europe considerably ahead of the U.S. in fuel efficiency for automobiles, but the gap would be much smaller. For the last several decades the U.S. has fallen sadly behind Europe and Japan in fuel efficiency. The perception of poor fuel efficiency hurt the automakers badly during periods of high fuel prices and when buyers were facing difficult economic choices. The automakers are beginning to grasp this fact. Mark Reuss, president of General Motors, commented that- "it's very challenging, but its upto us engineers to provide high value to the customer and support the environment." This is an issue that has serious national and global implications as it affects the future prices and demand for oil, emissions, and future economic growth. It would also bring the U.S. in line with Europe and Japan when it comes to fuel efficiency of automobiles. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ's Laurence Norman talks to Yukiya Amano, head of the UN agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has the responsibility of verification and inspection of Iran's nuclear development and facilities. Amano describes the issues raised by a 2011 report which outlined 12 sets of concerns to which Iran has to explain, a condition included in the final nuclear agreement. Iran has to respond by mid-August, IAEA then responds, and does work in Sept and Oct, and submits its report by Dec. 2015. Yamano says he has to fill in all the missing pieces in this jigsaw puzzle to get a full picture of Iran's nuclear development. Iran has denied access to military sites and Mr. Amano couldn't say if he has access to the Parchin military site. A concession that was made in the agreement is the long interval of three weeks before access to a particular site that arouses suspicions-the agreement gives Iran the right to appeal an IAEA request to visit such a site to a special commission. The U.S. and its European allies have a majority on the commission yet three weeks are allowed in which Iran could move material to some other location. For critics the question will be why such a concession was needed if Iran truly has decided not to develop nuclear weapons technologies. The U.S. president's response at a news conference on July 15, 2015, was that with the laws of physics the U.S. monitoring tools would detect nuclear activity at that site. The agreement also gives Iran an earlier than planned lifting of a ban on sales of arms and missiles and missile parts if the IAEA says Iran's nuclear activities are peaceful. Iran could conceivably wait till the ban is lifted and its economy in a much stronger position to withstand any future limited sanctions to pursue nuclear weapons development. This would have delayed development for a few years during which time the hope is that Iran has changed into a more peaceful nation pursuing economic development in its region, yet even if this is the case as as happened with India and Pakistan it could still pursue nuclear weapons development. The alternative is a status quo till a better agreement is reached with the leverage of tight economic sanctions and continuing dialogue during which time Iran continues to get closer to a nuclear weapon, or the use of force to prevent this. Iran added the arms embargo issue during the last weeks of the negotiation in June, a controversial move on Iran's part, as this may have complicated the picture with ballistic missiles technology exports to Iran approved after 8 years in the final agreement, compared to the agreement reached in April 2015 which made no mention of the lifting of the arms embargo. Iran played on the notion that if Zarif returned to Iran without an agreement hardliners including Khamanei would veto any agreement, yet this could just be the Iranian negotiating strategy. U.S. president Obama stated at the July 15, 2015 news conference that it would be hard to hold sanctions for longer. Critics might argue that China was already benefitting from the small easing of sanctions by increasing Iranian oil imports by 30% in 2014, and would have less incentive to withdraw from sanctions, as it is dependent on the U.S. and the EU, major markets for its exports and access to technologies. A WSJ/NBC poll in July shows almost half of the people polled in the U.S. saying they do not know enough to express an opinion, a steady 36% support an agreement, showing that the public has not been educated and taken along during the different steps in the largely secret negotiations....

ObamaCare's Reality Deficit

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Questions about the true cost of the Obama health care legislation and the assumption that the legislation cuts the deficit by billions of dollars. This WSJ editorial says one has to look at this closely, and not merely look at CBO projections, which may be based in a certain context and not reflect the true costs, especially because many accounting gimmicks and use of numbers to present a particular picture is taking place. The information this editorial cites is that: it uses 10 years of taxes to fund six years of subsidies, Social Security and Medicare revenues are double-counted to the tune of $398 billion, a new program funding long-tem care frontloads taxes but backloads spending, and the assumption of an automatic 25% cut to physician payments that Congress is unwilling to authorize. Rep. Rand Paul has tried to present an alternative view which needs to be studied just as closely, because of the enormous impact of a jump in spending at a time when the public finances are fragile. WSJ also cites the work of Richard Foster, the chief Medicare actuary, as an alternate perspective of how things could turn out, Doug Holtz-Eakin, and Eugene Steuerle. It calls for common sense in evaluating programs, entitlements, defense or other government spending. They not only cost money, but costs escalate over time as history has shown over decades, till they eventually are discovered to be not affordable unless the middle class is willing to dig deeper into its finances to pay for them. Alternate perspectives from a range of informed opinion, Howard Dean, Martin Feldstein, and the head of Harvard's Medical School show that the issue needs to be looked at closely and carefully and cannot be something in which CBO numbers can be trusted to tell the whole story. Especially when common sense, history, and informed opinion across a spectrum of thought advises caution, and fragile public finances also suggest caution. Howard Dean, former Governor of Vermont, says the health care bill is not real reform, and may do more harm than good. He says in a Washington Post article, December 17, 2009, the Obama health care bill does not insert competition into insurance markets, does not significantly reduce costs, and does not improve the delivery and use of health services. It was he says done with a political calculus and crafted for votes not real reform. Jeffrey S. Flier, Dean of the Harvard Medical School, gave the Obama health reform bill an "F" grade, saying in a Nov 18, 2009, WSJ article, that it was disingenuous to call this reform, Congress and the White House were simply deceiving the public. He said the bill will accelerate US health care spending, postpone most of the major health care problems, expecially the ones that drive cost, including the "fee for service" system and delivery of health care. He says in his discussions with economists and other health care leaders the opinion was unanimous that the bill will accelerate health care spending. He cites Massachusetts as an example, where access to care was expanded under the same dysfunctional system, and spending went up, and it doesn't work. Feldstein, who in early 2008 suggested proactive solutions to the mortgage debt crisis which were never adopted, says that the Obama health care law means higher taxes in the long run to pay for the $1 trillion cost of health care for the uninsured group over 10 years. Feldstein says that the Obama plan is to cut Medicare to cut spending, and will reduce the amount of medical services, as reduced spending comes from fewer services, not reducing payments to providers. And he asks if the cost reductions are weighted too heavily towards reduced services and not reduced payments to providers ,would this result in large cuts to services to affect the quality of healthcare for the 85% of the American people who are accustomed to a different pattern of healthcare. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Tom Wright shows the results of an examination by the WSJ of the operations of 1Malaysia Development Fund BhD, setup in 2009 for economic development. This report shows lack of transparency and use of the state owned and operated fund to indirectly help the ruling UMNO party and prime minister Najib Razak in the tight 2013 Malaysian general elections. The 1MDB fund is becoming a huge controversy in Malaysia as the former head of the UNMO party and prime minister for 22 years Mr. Mahathir Mohammed, and the opposition parties in Malaysia, are questioning the lack of transparency at 1MDB fund and misuse of funds. Prime minister Najib Razak is chairman of the board of advisors of the fund. The problem is serious because of the $11 billion in debt of the fund- and the need to reschedule debt repayments. The financial report of the fund of March 31, 2014 shows interest costs taking up half of revenues. A $260 million emergency credit was provided by the government in 2015, and a Abu Dhabi state fund provided $1 billion, in an effort to meet loan repayments. Moody's Investors Service and private investment funds see the government eventually coming up with a bailout of 1MDB. Malaysia's currency the ringgit has lost 6% of its value in the first 6 months of 2015, and foreign investors are taking funds out of the country. On the questions of transparency the WSJ examination shows a questionable deal with the Genting Group which owns a casino in New York, and $ 4 billion casino in Las Vegas, plantations, real estate, and power plants in Malaysia. In one deal between Genting and 1MDB, a 75% interest in a power plant near Kuala Lumpur was bought at highly inflated prices, according to the WSJ examination. Genting is shown to have helped the UMNO in the Najib 2013 election campaign. 1MDB has also raised money just before the 2013 election with a $3 billion bond offering arranged by Goldman Sachs in March 2013. The United Malays National Organization (UMNO) party which openly favors Malays has ruled Malaysia for all the years since independence from Britain in 1957. In the 2013 election a key battleground was in Penang state which went to the opposition Democratic Action Party, and the UMNO failed to get a majority of the vote. It held onto government through electoral rules that gave a higher number of parliamentary seats for the rural areas where UMNO draws large support. The situation in Malaysia is unusual because power has shifted to opposition parties in most of the countries in the region- Indonesia, Philippines following dictatorships, Pakistan and Bangladesh following military rule, India and Japan following a long spell under the Congress party and the LDP. Only in Malaysia and Singapore have the UMNO and the PAP party of Lee Kuan Yew held on for almost 6 decades, by keeping opposition parties weak and not allowing a two party system to develop. Indonesia, another Muslim country, has moved ahead with free and fair elections with the recent election of Widodo as president, leading to significant efforts to improve infrastructure development and other parts of the economy. Experts say healthy two party systems and free elections provide economic benefits by giving voters a choice between competing economic plans for the future, as is seen in the higher future growth prospects under new leadership for India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, the Philippines, and including Japan with the shift back to the LDP with Abe. Corruption, lack of transparency, and poor management of the economy, are major issues with entrenched parties. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Its now known that some of the money that the government used to bailout AIG is going to Deutsche Bank and Goldman Sachs, so that they can pay the hedge funds to whome they sold credit default swaps. The way it works is this. Hedge funds bet against the housing market that if mortgage defaults reach a certain level they would be paid a large amount. To do this they buy credit default swaps from banks like Deutsche Bank and Goldman. In turn Deutsch and Goldman go out and hedge the risks of selling these credit default swaps. Its hard to find someone to sell this insurance, but AIG becomes the dominant insurer for these credit default swaps. What does AIG get out of this. Only fractions of apenny for every dollar of insurance sold to the banks, less than $10 million for $1 billion of insurance. These swaps were sold in 2005, when some of these hedge funds saw risks in the housing markets excesses, and they were making the bets for an event that was a very plausible one, with very little risk to themselves. And the banks were passing on a lot of the risk for insurance on the cheap to AIG, which ends being the sucker holding a big part of the risk. What did have to gain from this, and why it agreed to sell this insurance is a mystery. Its this insurance that has caused AIG its biggest headache, to have to set aside money to pay the banks who in turn pay the hedge funds. When these pools of mortgage assets of companies like Countrywide Financial, which were created by Deutsche Bank and Goldman, called by names such as 'START' and 'ABACUS', went down in value AIG has to set aside money to pay the banks. As these assets fall in value from mid September to December 2008, AIG and by this the government which now owns 80% of AIG, paid $5.4 billion to Deutsche and $8.1 billion to Goldman under credit default swap contracts AIG has written. This adds up to $52 billion paid to all the banks that bought insurance for credit default swaps they sold and covered with AIG insurance. And this is a large part of the $170 billion of government money to AIG. Its for this kind of financial wizardry that makes little sense, and showed no sense of responsibility for the firm, that the Financial Products Group's 370 employees are to be rewarded with $400 million in bonuses, with binding contracts as reported in the Washington Post. The $165 million so widely reported in bonuses sent out recently, are only a part of the $400 million. While this is going on its surreal that on the other side Michigan is hurting , auto states in the midwest are hurting badly. And $17 billion barely makes it through in time to keep GM and Chrysler running in December 2008, and the money can be called in by the government in February 2009 leading to these companies ending up in bankruptcy. This puts the situation in new perspective, and Rattner who heads the group looking at the GM restructuring must be aware of this, when he said bankruptcy is not necessarily the best option and the loans would not be called in by the government. Its job losses in the economy, and the fragile nature of the economic outlook, and also the way in which money is being scandalously wasted in other places like AIG with no purpose, that Rattner must have in the back of his mind as he looks at money for GM restructuring and jobs for hurting workers. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Putin was born in St Petersburg, then called Leningrad, where his father worked in a factory making railway cars. He studied law at Leningrad State University, graduated in 1975 and went through KGB training before going to Dresden in 1985, where he remained with the KGB till 1990 and the collapse of the Berlin Wall. By 1990, the Soviet Union collapsed and from 1990 to 1996, Putin worked in St. Petersburg first as assistant and then as Deputy Mayor with Anatoly Sobchak, a law professor at Leningrad State University, and Mayor of St. Petersburg. After Sobchak narrowly lost the election, Putin left for a position in the property department in the Kremlin, joining other Sobchak associates who worked in the Kremlin. From 1996 to 1999, Putin moved up quickly in the chaotic Yeltsin years. In 1998 he was promoted to head the FSB, the successor to the KGB. And in August 1999, Yeltsin appointed Putin Prime Minister. In December 1999, Yeltsin appointed Putin acting president. Putin named Medvedev, deputy chief of staff in 2000. The five years in the St. Petersburg city administration and the years in Moscow in the Kremlin under Yeltsin were chaotic years for Russia and for Putin, as he observed first hand the lawlessness and general breakdown in Russia. This may have influenced the early Yeltsin years enthusiasm for democracy, to an appreciation of the problems for democracy in the actual environment that he was facing in Russia. He developed a distrust of the innocent enthusiasm of Americans for a wholesale transfer of American and British political institutions to the Russian environment. This was a period of great shock in Russia, as even the lifespan of Russians was declining rapidly in this period, and there was a lot of poverty. The struggles between the Mayor and the city council in St Petersburg, even as the city was facing food shortages and economic collapse, and the latter Yeltsin years may have convinced Putin of the need to combine democratic society and elections with a strong central administration, with authority concentrated in a Presidential system and not a parliamentary democracy. In bringing central direction he brought in his KGB connections, but in choosing his successor he turned to a law student at Leningrad State University of Sobchak's, who is quite different from Putin's KGB associates. Medvedev is a softspoken thoughtful administrator and intellectual compared to Putin, and his experience covers the 10 years both Putin and Medvedev spent together both in St. Petersburg and Moscow in 1990-2000, and the period from 2000 to the present day- when Medvedev served both as Putin's head of staff and as head of Gazprom. See the link to the St Petersburg Times, November 6, 2007 on Medvedev. From his St. Petersburg days Putin clearly understood the need for foreign investment and the need to create a climate for attracting foreign investment. This seems to be happening as Russia draws more foreign investment for industry and infrastructure. His background with the KGB shows up in the centralization of authority in the light of the chaotic years and economic collapse preceding it. And his days as part of Sobchak's efforts to bring democracy to St Petersburg shows up in his continuing respect for democratic elections and the Russian constitution. One compromise was made in the process- a consolidation of the media so that opposition's access to the media may not be what it could be, and at the same time it does reflect the tide of popular opinion in Russia that credits the economic recovery and progress and optimism for the future to the Putin administration. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Bush administration's and Paulson's thinking that letting the government buy parts of the banking system was unthinkable, as recently as late September, may have led to squandering of valuable time. Now Paulson is following Gordon Brown's lead in planning an injection of capital in banks in return for equity stakes, using much of the $700 billion Congress has authorized, and Paulson says the package that passed Congress gives Treasury all the authority it needs to do so. The failure to be open to this thinking earlier may have cost valuable time in addressing this crisis. And now there are second thoughts on whether it was wise to let Lehman fall into bankruptcy, because the Administration had not correctly anticipated or calculated the true cost of the Lehmann bankruptcy in terms of the way it created a crisis in the rest of the financial system. Paulson has still not taken Gordon Brown's lead in guaranteeing lending between the banks which the British are doing as part of their plan. Is the administration too slow in its response and a bit wrongheaded or stubborn headed as each step of the crisis has moved faster than its ability to respond, and its response being one step behind. Frederic Mishkin of Columbia University a former Fed Governor says, "if you delay and create uncertainty, the amount of money you have to put up goes up." It appears from Paulson's remarks over time first turning down proposals for capital injection into banks for equity stakes, and now in making that route central to his plan, that Paulson and Bernanke simply did not anticipate the shutting down of credit markets and the collapse of stock market prices that occurred, and they had no backup plan prepared for a situation such as this. And on top of this the backup plan they went out to sell to Congress turned out to be short on details and in this sense naive for the amount requested. And then by refusing to consider alternatives such as capital injection for equity stakes, it was wrong headed, if not closed minded. William Poole who retired in August as President of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, says that " I am not aware that Treasury presented any evidence on auctions that have been successful when they are used for assets that are so heterogenous", referring to the reverse auctions that would take weeks to set up and would be terribly complicated to buy up troubled assets, as part of the plan presented to Congress in but 3 pages. Now the plan appears to be to let Fannie and Freddie, which were given $100 billion by the Treasury as authorized by Congress, to move ahead with the purchase of troubled mortgage securities, something for which Fannie and Freddie have the capabilities. In the end the crisis in confidence and near panic generated in the markets and the climate of fear may go way beyond the actual losses incurred from debt securities, and some of this may be the result of a clumsy and poorly thought out approach by Bernanke and Paulson. The cost of fixing the problem will be higher and the recession more prolonged because of this. It is a situation of capable people blinded by ideological reasons to see what is happening and in Bernanke's case not making enough of a case to Treasury about his reservations and his own thinking that capital injection was the right approach, as people familiar with the early planning say Bernanke argued that it would be easier and more efficient to inject capital directly into banks. ...
New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The divisive atmosphere in Wisconsin after governor Walker's action against public union bargaining rights, the protests and recall effort that followed.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Senator Mitch McConnell, the U.S. Senate Majority leader, and Speaker Ryan, achieved a win in the U.S. Congress which is expected to set a new trend of bipartisan cooperation, as the House passed the bill in Dec. 2015 for $1.1 trillion spending with a vote of 316 to 113, and the Senate with vote of 65 to 33. The persuasion on the Republican side was based on giving Speaker Ryan a strong hand in negotiations with the White House in 2016. Ryan secured a lifting of the oil export ban for the Republican side in return for flexibility in spending. Ryan deftly sent the issue of Puerto Rico having access to bankruptcy laws to the committe chairmen to come up with a plan in March to get the needed votes. Democrats had pushed for aid to Puerto Rico. Also included in the bill that passed is giving more voice to emerging market countries China and India in the running of the IMF.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Preident Karzai of Afghanistan joins the three way peace talks of the U.S. and Afghanistan's government with the Taliban, with the cooperation of Pakistan.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Ashraf Khalil describes the history of relations between the Muslim Brotherhood leadership and the leaders of secular parties with prescient remarks on how this creates problems in Egypt's transition to democratic government. The mistake made by the Muslim Brotherhood leaders, says Khalil, is to insist on a quick move to elections in November 2011, with the Brotherhood hoping to gain advantage in seats with its organization already in place compared to the secular parties which need more time to stage an organized effort. If this results in a lopsided result with the Muslim Brotherhood gaining more seats than its real strength, and the secular parties feeling left out in a revolution to set up democratic government that they led, Egypt's transition to democracy will remain flawed. This is now the stuation as the military which sets the rules and the Muslim Brotherhood have agreed on immediate elections. The Muslim Brotherhood's leaders have spent years being suppressed by the Mubarak regime, and lack the experience needed for such a difficult transition as Egypt faces, even with the best of intentions. Compressing the transition into a short time frame makes it even more difficult. Errors of judgement by Muslim Brotherhood leaders in not developing a consensus, and the uncertain role of the post-Mubarak military and police, compound the difficulties and risks....
New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
After the Phase 1 trade deal with China led to cancellation of new tariffs on computers, mobile phones and the remaining products imported from China, tariffs are still in place on $370 billion of imports from China. President Trump says China agreed to import $32 billion of agricultural goods, with the figures reaching $50 billion in 2020. The prior high was $26 billion in 2012. This comes as a big relief for the agricultural farm sector which had 24% more bankruptcies in 2019. Farmers are now more likely to vote for president Trump as they did in the last election. In addition China agreed to buy $200 billion more of American goods over the next 2 years. This combined with the USMCA agreement to replace NAFTA, for North American trade, is good news for president Trump and for the U.S. economy for 2% annual growth. The S&P stock index went up by 29% in 2019. The big concession by China is its agreement to agree to penalties if it does not keep up its part of the bargain.  Intellectual property protection remains a challenge and Mr. Trump may have decided to take a tactical success and shore up his base of farmers and small business people before taking up these issues in the future. China for its part may have decided to make a tactical move of its own as it has nothing to lose in importing more farm products from the U.S. in exchange for being able to continue to make the computers, iPhones and tech products it manufactures, just like before. China has not conceded much in terms of its goals set  in "Made in China 2025." Both sides are taking a much needed pause to consolidate their positions, as the fundamental differences remain to be tackled. Huawei and Chinese technology issue remains as before with the U.S. wary of China's technological gains in 5G telecom equipment and keen on building and protecting America's technological advantage in future trade relations. ...
YouTube Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
PM Modi visits Gandhiji's Sabarmati Ashram in Ahmedabad and inaugurates the $145 million Sabarmati Ashram renovation project. In June 1917 Mohandas Gandhi bought land on the banks of the Sabarmati river to build the Ashram. It was the central location for Gandhiji's struggle with the British for Hind Swaraj, independence from Britain. The ideas in Gandhi's Hind Swaraj written in 1910 during the struggle for South African workers was implemented from here including the Satyagraha struggles, negotiations with the British Raj, Dandi march to the sea in April 1930 to protest the tax on salt. It was originally on 120 acres which by 2020 were reduced to 5 acres. The new project will expand the Ashram to 57 acres into a major worldwide center for learning about Gandhi's life and ideas and the role for gaining Bharat Swaraj or freedom and its role in Bharat's future for a new generation of youth. Leaders including Sardar Vallahbhai Patel and Narendra Modi look to Gandhiji's ideas for inspiration and guidance in the everyday administration of the country. Gandhi's ideas anticipate not just the aspirations for freedom with taking responsibility for one's own actions, but also the movements for respecting nature through climate change action, uplifting of rural areas, and the improvement of the living conditions of working people and families everywhere in the world. The Ashram exhibition shows documents including letters to the Viceroy in the 1920's showing the budget for the Empire in India and asking why so much went to defense and military and so little to uplifting the lives of the people, in education, health and infrastructure. Having seen it at the Ashram one could say such a direct letter to the head of a large nation, as the Viceroy in India was then is unimaginable today. In some ways emails and electronic communication have made contact with officials and government less not more and created a seemingly insurmountable gap today. ...
WSJ Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us